silverhawk
Loc: Born a West Virginian, Living in Virginia
The idea of ancient men as brutish cave people who had low intelligence is a product of evolutionary thinking. The truth is is that ancient men were humans who were intelligent and did many of the things modern humans do. They weren't dragging their women around by the hair and grunting "oh..oh oh..." (like the TV show from the 60's) :)
Just because we have the internet and computers doesn't make us superior to them.
silverhawk wrote:
The most enormous ancient construction.....How/Who... (
show quote)
Sorry. I don't have an answer. What puzzles me is how ancient people moved blocks of stone weighing hundreds of tons. Yes, it's possible, but it takes so much work!
jerryc41 wrote:
Sorry. I don't have an answer. What puzzles me is how ancient people moved blocks of stone weighing hundreds of tons. Yes, it's possible, but it takes so much work!
Not if you use your noggin instead of brute force.
rpavich wrote:
The idea of ancient men as brutish cave people who had low intelligence is a product of evolutionary thinking. The truth is is that ancient men were humans who were intelligent and did many of the things modern humans do. They weren't dragging their women around by the hair and grunting "oh..oh oh..." (like the TV show from the 60's) :)
Just because we have the internet and computers doesn't make us superior to them.
There is no reason to suppose that, as the human race developed - grew taller and stronger - better athletes - more knowledgeable - that are brains did not also develop. I, for one, feel sure that they have done just that.
Delderby wrote:
There is no reason to suppose that, as the human race developed - grew taller and stronger - better athletes - more knowledgeable - that are brains did not also develop. I, for one, feel sure that they have done just that.
I guess if you subscribe to the idea of evolution then yes, but if you don't then there certainly IS a reason to think that they were just as intelligent as we are.
History channel said little green men from Mars did all the work.
It seems they were at the beginning of learning(brain size aside) where as we have had untold centuries of research to accumulate our so called vastly superior knowledge. Though with way our world is going today I'm wondering how much good its doing us.
llamb
Loc: Northeast Ohio
You roll heavy things. You balance in the center to turn them. Ask any farmer how to...
If I had to build a pyramid in the desert with 100 laborers:
Move sand away get to a solid base and to create a downward slope
Find stone and cut stone*
Transport on rollers and rafts to site and slide them down into position
Once the foundation is in place, move sand around it
Repeat above for following levels
After top peak is in place move the surrounding sand away and there's a pyramid
* Egypt! Africa has diamonds. Place them on proposed cut-line and have laborers work a long piece of wood back and forth. The diamonds will embed in the wood and cut the stone - it's called lapping. Working hammered in wedges is another way to cut stone.
I'd build one for you but I'm in my 70's and have leaves to rake this week.
~Lee
CPR
Loc: Nature Coast of Florida
There are rational explanations for all of the big construction projects. All include lots of people and some thinking.
rpavich wrote:
I guess if you subscribe to the idea of evolution then yes, but if you don't then there certainly IS a reason to think that they were just as intelligent as we are.
I have heard evolution described as survival of the fittest. The fittest at making war? Or the fittest at making peace? Or the fittest at thought processing?
Delderby wrote:
I have heard evolution described as survival of the fittest. The fittest at making war? Or the fittest at making peace? Or the fittest at thought processing?
That's the problem..since it's just an idea it can be anything you need it to be at anytime to explain anything. Humans love for each other? We evolved to do that...humans making war with each other? We evolved to do that...it fits any scenario according to those who subscribe to it.
We all have the same artifacts, bones, fossils and such but how we explain their history is dependent upon our starting assumptions. Our presuppositions determine our conclusions.
Jerry, this might provide an answer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5pZ7uR6v8c--Bob
jerryc41 wrote:
Sorry. I don't have an answer. What puzzles me is how ancient people moved blocks of stone weighing hundreds of tons. Yes, it's possible, but it takes so much work!
G Brown
Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK
History is all about great kings and leaders - yet ordinary people are there doing ordinary things too. In a land without many trees you make your house from stone. the better the construction the more people learn how to copy it. The richer people can afford bigger and better. But it is still down to ordinary people building it. If you move big stone blocks on rollers then it is a small jump to make columns.
In the UK we learn about Vikings raping and killing as they conquered, Then other kings raising armies and killing them. From exploration of the east coastal areas we find extremely few bodies bearing battle scars. No more that would be found today in the UK....The conquests were simply migrants who came and settled, bringing their customs with them - no big deal. But not nationalistic enough for historians trying to make history 'exciting' and giving rich people a 'historic precedence' of being strong leaders. The great battles were fought with small numbers of people. Certainly not enough to Conquer a whole population.
As for technology - When people need it - someone invents it. This has happened at similar times, so many times, across different continents that have not been visited or conquered. It seems we only learn when we have to: need to or are allowed to. The different styles of building basic block on block merely show that different people start from a different standing point or are using different stone or tools.
Present day man has access to other cultures, yet we still do not have a single building process. The Normans built castles because in a rolling fairly treeless countryside, how else can you build a protective wall. When they came to the UK it was old technology to them. It worked why change it. In the US you built log cabins because you had new growth trees that were straight and tall. You still copy their designs. Wood is still a major part of house building whereas now we in the UK do not have enough wood to satisfy need but plenty of clay to make bricks cheaply.
'Mystery' is a favorite word for 'snake oil' salesmen !
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.